


A Biographical Analysis of Angelica Schuyler

by whydidoth



Category: Alexander Hamilton - Ron Chernow, Hamilton - Miranda, Hamilton - Miranda (Broadway Cast) RPF, Historical RPF
Genre: Angelica schuyler - Freeform, Character Analysis, Essay, Gen, Historical, Historical analysis, Nonfiction, biography
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2018-06-19
Updated: 2018-06-19
Packaged: 2019-05-25 08:52:02
Rating: General Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 1
Words: 3,507
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/14973557
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/whydidoth/pseuds/whydidoth
Summary: A look into Angelica Schuyler as an important figure and how she has been represented throughout history.Please note: This is not a work of fiction. This is an actual biographical essay I wrote that I thought more people than just my teacher should read.





	A Biographical Analysis of Angelica Schuyler

When considering Revolutionary Era America, tales of the Boston Tea Party and George Washington’s valor color the perception of the period. Aside from the great honor of liberty and war, many intellectuals worked together to form one of the first major democracies and a great, influential country. Though the Founding Fathers played a major role in the creation of the United States, it was the more common folk and women who made the country. Angelica Schuyler, an American socialite who held major influence over many of the Founders, stood among the political powerhouses of the Revolutionary Era. Despite the respect she garnered and the power she yielded, Schuyler has been generally written off by history as merely a rich, elegant woman. Through the continual undermining of the roles of women in shaping society, her legacy has been distorted to be little more than a fanciful and flirtatious footnote of American history.  
Angelica Schuyler was born on February 20, 1756, in Albany, New York, to Philip Schuyler and Catherine Van Rensselaer (Christoph 39). Due to her family’s history, she was born into great and old wealth. Raised in the New York countryside in a towering manor house with thirteen slaves attending on her--a generous number for people not in possession of a farm--her childhood lifestyle was more akin to that of a rich, Southern plantation owner than that of an average Northerner (Stevenson 12; Wolfe, [Online]). It is no wonder that Schuyler was raised in such a decadent manner seeing as not only were the Schuylers one of the old wealth families of New York, but through her mother she was also related to the Van Rensselaers and through her grandmothers to the Van Cortlandts, the two other major old wealth Dutch families of New York (Durante [Online]).   
From an early age, Schuyler was introduced to politics and high society. Her father, when first joining the New York Assembly, moved her out to the city where she not only received a high class education, but also frequented her father’s political dinner parties. It was likely at these dinner parties dinner parties where she became acquainted with the Livingstons, the Moores, and many other political notables including John Barker Church, her future husband. Church was a recent migrant from England who was suspected to have fled from England due to either extreme debt or dishonorably killing someone in a duel (Wolfe). Schuyler, aware her parents would disapprove of such a disadvantageous marriage, fled the city with Church and eloped, a trend that all but one of her sisters would follow (Christoph 40, 41).  
After their marriage and some time in Boston, where Church began to build his fortune, the couple moved to Paris and then London. Once in London, Schuyler quickly surrounded herself with the rich and powerful; people such as the Prince of Wales, Charles James Fox, John Trumbull, Maria and Richard Cosway, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin all of whom frequented her parties and considered themselves her friends (Wolfe). In the light of the status of Schuyler and her Church within British high society, it would not be unreasonable to conclude it was due to her likability and the influence she held within the British government that Church was able to secure a position in the House of Commons.  
During her time in Europe, she would occasionally cross the Atlantic to be with the rest of her family and participate in the major political events of the fledgling country of the United States, such as when she visited to witness the inauguration of George Washington. While away, Schuyler often lamented the distance from her younger sister and brother-in-law, Elizabeth Schuyler and Alexander Hamilton (Chernow 281). The assumption Angelica Schuyler, as well as her family, held was that she would never return to the United States for more than a brief visit, but all of them were proven wrong when she moved back to Albany in 1799 after her husband received some land in upstate New York from a man who was in debt to him (Clune 157).  
Schuyler never held any official or elected political position, but she did wield great power with impressive skill throughout her life. Not only was she likely a major factor in getting her husband elected to Parliament, but she was also one of Hamilton’s main correspondents regarding the political climate of Europe. She often used this correspondence to advise him on various political matters such as how the locals of London felt about the Jay Treaty (Chernow 485). Furthermore, she was the one to rally many influential political figures in order to get the Marquis de Lafayette released from the Olmütz prison (University of Virginia [Online]).  
Though not many give her the true amount of respect she is due, Schuyler was still a popular and powerful figure in her time. Due to her family lineage, she was already in a position of great influence with many figures cozying up to her in order to win her father’s favor. Her generation was the first to have the full conglomeration of the old wealth Dutch families: the Schuylers, Van Rensselaers, and Van Cortlandts. From the intermarriage of these three families, the Schuylers came into possession of around 52,000 acres of land and a small fiefdom (Wolfe). Stemming from her great-grandfather, Pieter Schuyler, who served as the first mayor of Albany, the Schuyler family has been deeply involved in the expansion and investment of the area. Through their political standing in New York society, her family’s name came to hold a grand history and incur a high level of respect from all those that were familiar with it. Not only were they friends with other influencers of the Northern colonies such as the Livingstons (Holland Society), but they also maintained genial relations with many British officials that came to visit New York (Wolfe).  
Beyond her family, Schuyler was the head of one of the most influential high society circles during her time in Europe. Her house sat along the Thames, only a few miles from Buckingham Palace (“Philip Church’s Career”, New York Times), placing her in a central and accessible part of the city. Notables, from the then Prince of Wales to Benjamin Franklin, all routinely enjoyed her fine company. James McHenry once remarked “[Angelica Schuyler] is a fine woman. She charms in all companies. No one has seen her, of either sex, who has not been pleased with her, and she has pleased every one” (McHenry, [Online]). Despite the influence over people and politics that she held, few outside of her close circle viewed her as anything more than a particularly attentive and perhaps a bit head-strong wife of John Barker Church.  
Among the relationships she held with the powerful members of high society, two of the most notable ones arise from her relationships with Thomas Jefferson and her brother-in-law Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson, after being introduced to Angelica Schuyler by Maria Cosway, quickly became enamoured with the vivacious socialite (Baskervill). Throughout their correspondence, Jefferson pursued her companionship and at times out right propositioned her for a sexual relationship (Wolfe). One one occasion, Jefferson offered that when she returned to the United States, he would give her a special tour of all the largest and most remarkable parts of the landscape, the sexual implication fully intended. He wrote, “Let’s go back together [to the United States]... I will attend you to the falls of Niagara, if you will go with me to the passage of the Potowmac, the Natural Bridge" (David 65) Jan Lewis, a professor at Rutgers University, holds that in this period, if one was endeavouring to make an impression on a woman, then she should certainly be brought to the Falls or the Bridge. Wolfe theorizes that Schuyler was the closest Jefferson had come to finding someone to equal and perhaps replace his deceased wife. Despite the risque correspondence, it is most likely that such a relationship never extended past their letters. Their relationship was eventually stifled by the conflict between Jefferson and her brother-in-law Hamilton, though they still departed on relatively good terms. As Jefferson wrote to her: "The morning you left us, all was wrong, even the sunshine was provoking, with which I never quarelled before." Even though correspondence between the two decreased significantly with Jefferson’s departure from Paris, they still remained fond of one another.  
The letters between Schuyler and Hamilton were also rather flirtatious in nature, but speculation of an affair has generally been discarded among historians. Due to the timing of her visits to the United States, it would be rather unfeasible to sustain any form of a physically romantic relationship. Furthermore, it was contended that the fiercely close relationship Angelica Schuyler possessed with Hamilton’s wife and her younger sister, Elizabeth, allowed for a deeper degree of intimacy in their relationship than most siblings-in-law would have (Chernow 134). Ultimately, it’s much more plausible that the two shared a particularly close friendship rather than being lovers.  
Angelica Schuyler, similarly to many other women of her period, does not have a biography of her own. Instead, she is brought up as an interesting footnote in the lives of men. Men other women of this period experience a similar plight; the most notable women to receive biographies, Martha Washington and Abigail Adams, likely only did due to the prominence of their husbands. The most common appearance of her personage occurs in pieces detailing the lives of Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. In the authoritative works about each, The Paris Years of Thomas Jefferson (1997) by William Howard Adams and Alexander Hamilton (2004) by Ron Chernow, Schuyler is allowed a decent portion of pages to address in what likelihood did an extramarital relationship occur between her and either of the two men. Though both biographies conclude that the most likely scenario was that nothing came of the relationships, the topic in these two books as well as many other sources is still broached so as to highlight the philandering antics of the two gentlemen. Perhaps the most defaming aspect of only including her in a sexual context is that the profound respect the two held for her striking wit and dazzling personality is rarely mentioned.  
In other occasions, Schuyler is blatantly written out of the narrative. She played one of the most vital roles in releasing the Marquis de Lafayette from the Olmütz prison, impassionately writing letters to all her correspondents in order to rally support for his release. Her tactic eventually succeeded, yet when the story of Lafayette’s release is detailed both then and now, it often fails to include any mention of the actions of Angelica Schuyler (“Lafayette at Olmütz”, New York Times). An extreme case of erasure is found in regards to the historical sketches of the New York town Angelica, a town that is named after her and built on her husband’s property. When her husband received a couple of acres of upstate land from a man who was in debt to him, their eldest son went to the land and began construction of the town, named Angelica, and later the prominent mansion of the area, Belvidere (Clune 159). Once the town was established, Schuyler and her husband moved to the countryside to spend more time with their son and daughter-in-law (Hart). In written pieces about the town of Angelica, she was often quickly glossed over. Rather insultingly, in an oral account of the early years and founding of the town provided by her own granddaughter, Schuyler was only referred to as the wife of John Barker Church. These portrayals of her, of which there are many, have done little to preserve her legacy, and ultimately they serve to undermine the importance of various actions which she undertook in her life.  
The most notable recent portrayal of the Revolutionary time period would be that of the musical Hamilton by Lin-Manuel Miranda. The musical, following the rather complex life of Alexander Hamilton, does place Angelica Schuyler in a central role, but falls prey to mistreating her character, portraying her as little more than a distressed maiden. Though Miranda does seem to try to establish her as a strong, independent woman, the main traits of Schuyler within the musical come to simply be embedded in her enamourment with Hamilton and her love for her younger sister. The first number she makes a main appearance in is ‘Work’, the intended use of the song being to introduce the three eldest Schuyler sisters. Her initial portrayal in ‘Work’ seems to start off on the right foot, showing her to be at odds with unwanted the flirtation of men and a determination to not let society undermine her ambitions. “You want a revolution,” she sings as the sisters tour around Manhattan, “I want a revelation… and when I meet Thomas Jefferson, I’m ‘a compel him to include women in the sequel [of the Declaration of Independence]!” Along these lines of working to improve her own social lot in life, Schuyler had been criticized by some of her contemporaries for being too outgoing and involved in politics (Clune 162). This aspect can be similarly seen in the song’s line, “I’ve been reading Common Sense by Thomas Paine, some men say that I’m intense or I’m insane.” Despite the compelling introduction to her character, this portrayal begins losing hold almost as soon as she meets Alexander Hamilton.  
Aside from her brief cameo in Elizabeth Schuyler’s song ‘Helpless’, wherein she says “I’m just sayin’, if you really loved me you would share him [Hamilton],” a reference to one of her letters where she writes “If you were as generous as the Old Romans you would lend him to me for a little while,” her next major appearance is in her song ‘Satisfied’. ‘Satisfied’, even if it does take some liberties on Schuyler’s true relationship with Hamilton, still woefully misportrays known facts. The main line of contention in the song is “I’m a girl in a world in which my only job is to marry rich. My father has no sons so I’m the one who has to social climb.” The first falsehood appears in her relationship status. The pair of Schuyler and Hamilton had likely first met about a year after she wedded John Barker Church, and it was two years later that Hamilton began courting her younger sister. By this point Schuyler had already had two children with Church and a third was soon to be on the way (Christoph 39). Not only was her supposed bachelorette status false, she was so unconcerned with “marrying rich” and “social climbing” that she eloped with Church without her parents’ permission and married below her status. The second falsehood is Schuyler’s apparent lack of brothers. Though she was the oldest, Schuyler had six younger brothers, the eldest of whom would have been seventeen years old when Elizabeth Schuyler and Alexander Hamilton got married. Though her family may have prefered that Schuyler settle down with a wealthy Dutch man, this was not the reality of the situation; ‘Satisfied’, however, certainly portrays it as though it were.  
‘Take a Break’ allows for another brief reprise of Schuyler’s wit and adeptness at politics. At this point in the musical, Hamilton is facing some difficulty in getting Congress to pass his plan on how to deal with the national debt. Schuyler urges Hamilton to “get through to Jefferson. Sit down with him and compromise, don’t stop ‘til you agree.” Despite this momentary allowance for her political influence and prowess to shine through, she then goes on to sing seven lines about how writing “My Dearest, Angelica” instead of “My Dearest Angelica” might mean Hamilton still holds feelings for her.  
The next misstep occurs in ‘The Reynolds Pamphlet’. Angelica is introduced in the song by saying “I came as soon as I heard.” The Reynolds Pamphlet was published in August of 1797. Though Schuyler had been in the United States in 1797, it was only for a brief period in May. She didn’t return again until 1799. It’s much more likely that she was sent a copy of The Reynolds Pamphlet in London and any grievances were conveyed through letters rather than rushing all the way across the Atlantic simply to scold him. ‘Congratulations’ was not included in the final version of the musical, but it continues the falsified narrative of Schuyler during the events of ‘The Reynolds Pamphlet’. Two lines in particular are heavily loaded with misconception. The first is “I languished in a loveless marriage in London.” Though the relationship between Schuyler and Church may not have been ideal, there is generally no evidence to suggest it was loveless. To outright state so is baseless and villainizes her relationship with her husband. The second point of contention is the line “I lived only to read your [Hamilton’s] letters.” Not only does this reinforce the assumption of a romantic relationship between the two, but it also isolates Schuyler to make it appear as though the only part of her life that was important is her relationship with Hamilton. Schuyler’s life in London was actually quite pleasant. Aside from the dinner parties she hosted, complete with solid silver dining sets , she also had a private box at the Drurylane Theater gifted to her from the royal family and had many friends in the area to share her company with (Clune 162; Wolfe). Her life was filled with decadent leisure and political intrigue whenever she desired it. The reality of her life is a far cry from the distressed maiden portrayed in the musical.  
Though Hamilton did a good job in raising awareness that Angelica Schuyler exists and does attempt to portray her character in a decent manner, the issue still arises that such a popular piece of modern theater can have major influence. For many people this musical was the first they had heard of Angelica Schuyler, thus they received a first impression of her colored by her woeful pining for the musical’s central character. Though such a portrayal can be forgiven seeing as how the play was from Alexander Hamilton’s perspective, it continues a dangerous precedent for the portrayal of this notable woman.  
Schuyler, from her reality to her historical representation to her modern portrayal, shifts from an important political figure and influencer to a romantic yet unimportant maiden to someone struggling to escape her romanticized image but still failing to do so. Each portrayal paints Schuyler to be an entirely different person, complete with different motivations and accomplishments which leads to increasing difficulty in finding the reality of who Angelica Schuyler was. In both her historical and modern representations, tied so closely to her hypothetical romantic forays with the Founding Fathers, she is isolated solely to her interactions, effectively creating an existence that is wholly reliant on others. One piece that can be certain is that Schuyler was hardly reliant on others to make her way in life. One can immediately recognize that her portrayal aligns perfectly with the perceived importance of women in history. In this aspect, Schuyler is hardly noteworthy; many women have been written out of the narrative of history despite their accomplishments because they are deemed unimportant in the shadows of their male contemporaries.  
The historical portrayals often seem to go out of their way to undermine the importance of her life and actions. Another factor to the detriment of her legacy is that many of her letters have been lost. Similarly to her sister who burned almost all of her letters, Schuyler’s letters were not preserved and as such, many records of them, as well as the correspondences themselves, have been lost. Though the University of Virginia was recently given eighty-four letters written to or from Angelica Schuyler and the National Archive has a little over one hundred letters that she is mentioned in, it’s highly plausible that she had a much greater amount of correspondence that has been lost. In this regard, it becomes harder to find first hand accounts of her and by her, losing along with the letters a different perspective of her character.  
The ultimate impact all these portrayals have on her is rather vast. Although Hamilton has done a remarkable job of returning Angelica Schuyler once more to the public eye, it also has the adverse effect of failing to accurately present her life, and it states unsupported facts about her. Furthermore, the musical has not sparked an increase in research surrounding her. A few other characters, particularly John Laurens and Elizabeth Schuyler, have seen their legacies revived as the public took a greater interest in their lives, but very little has been done on Angelica Schuyler and the great influence she held in political life. Though Schuyler is a remarkable figure and a sure role-model for women who feel society’s only expectation of them is to sit there and be subservient, biographical sketches have shaped her image to not be an impassioned and active figure, but rather a reaction to what was occurring around her.

**Author's Note:**

> Adams, William Howard. The Paris Years of Thomas Jefferson. Yale University Press, 2000.  
> Baskervill, Bill. “Newly Discovered Jefferson Letters Hint of Loneliness and Love.” Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Times, 21 July 1996.  
> Chernow, Ron. Alexander Hamilton. Head of Zeus, 2017.  
> Christoph, Florence A. Schuyler Genealogy: a Compendium of Sources Pertaining to the Schuyler Families in America Prior to 1800. Vol. 2, The Friends of Schuyler Mansion, 1987.  
> Clune, Henry W., and Douglas W. Gorsline. The Genesee. Syracuse University Press, 1988.  
> David, John Seh. The American Colonization Society: and the Founding of the First African Republic: a History of the Private Enterprise That Made Uneasy Peace with Slavery to Rescue Free Africans and Transplant Them on the West Coast of Africa. IUniverse LLC, 2014.  
> Durante, Dianne L. “Angelica Schuyler.” Dianne Durante Writer, 16 Apr. 2016.   
> “From Thomas Jefferson to Angelica Schuyler Church, 27 November 1793,” Founders Online, National Archives.  
> Hart, Angelica Church. “Visit to Caneadea.” Daughters of the American Revolution. Daughters of the American Revolution, Angelica, Sunnycroft.  
> Heads of Families: Census of 1790, New York. Stevenson's Genealogical Center, 1964.  
> “Lafayette at Olmütz.” New York Times, 7 Dec. 1873.  
> Papers of Angelica Schuyler Church, Accession #11245, 11245-a, Special Collections, University of Virginia Library, Charlottesville, Va.  
> “Philip Church's Career.” New York Times, 23 June 1895, p. 17.  
> Records of the Reformed Dutch Church of Albany, New York, Marriages, 1765-1779. Vol. 4, Holland Society of New York, 1907.


End file.
